5 ms·

> In many states even unknowing possession of stolen goods is a crime I've never heard of this. Source?

by unit91 8y ago

dexen 8y ago
Possession of stolen goods[1] is a crime USA-wide, and in many other countries. The rationale behind is ability to prosecute fences[2] - people who act as intermediaries and a layer of security between thieves and end-users, providing the thieves with option for easy cash-out. Edit: As a counter-point, at least in Poland, while obtaining stolen goods is an offense ("paserstwo"[3]), the buyer of any good or service that has a "legal defect" - including having been stolen, IIRC - has a valid legal case to demand recourse from the seller. The goods are nonetheless subject to forfeiture. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fence_(criminal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fence_(criminal) [3] https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paserstwo https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paserstwo
- cr1895 8y ago
  From your own link: "A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proven: The person received or concealed or stored or disposed of items of stolen property. The items were moving as, or constituted a part of, interstate commerce. The items had a value in excess of $5,000. The person acted knowingly and willfully." So that doesn't really answer the question asked, because it's only a federal crime if the goods are known to be stolen and a part of "interstate commerce." Now, at the state level, this may differ. But neither of us has that information.
  - dexen 8y ago
    A subsequent section on Wikipedia (link [1] in GP) tells us the following: >All US states also have laws regarding receipt of stolen property; however, there usually is no minimum dollar amount in many jurisdictions, and, of course, the requirement in Federal law regarding interstate commerce does not apply. i.e., USA-wide >Also, in many states (Ohio, for example), the burden to prove criminal intent is not as stringent or is nonexistent. i hereby rest my case.
    - icebraining 8y ago
      Curiously, the references backing those statements are both dead :)
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
jandrese 8y ago
If you surrender the goods and have a plausible reason for not knowing that they were stolen then you won't be prosecuted. You will be SoL on getting your money back unless you bought from the worlds most scrupulous fence though. It's a risk when you buy anything from eBay or the like, but the overall risk is small enough that the savings are justified usually.

> In many states even unknowing possession of stolen goods is a crime I've never heard of this. Source?

by unit91 8y ago

> In many states even unknowing possession of stolen goods is a crime I've never heard of this. Source?

Possession of stolen goods[1] is a crime USA-wide, and in many other countries. The rationale behind is ability to prosecute fences[2] - people who act as intermediaries and a layer of security between thieves and end-users, providing the thieves with option for easy cash-out. Edit: As a counter-point, at least in Poland, while obtaining stolen goods is an offense ("paserstwo"[3]), the buyer of any good or service that has a "legal defect" - including having been stolen, IIRC - has a valid legal case to demand recourse from the seller. The goods are nonetheless subject to forfeiture. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_of_stolen_goods [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fence_(criminal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fence_(criminal) [3] https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paserstwo https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paserstwo

cr1895 8y ago
From your own link: "A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proven: The person received or concealed or stored or disposed of items of stolen property. The items were moving as, or constituted a part of, interstate commerce. The items had a value in excess of $5,000. The person acted knowingly and willfully." So that doesn't really answer the question asked, because it's only a federal crime if the goods are known to be stolen and a part of "interstate commerce." Now, at the state level, this may differ. But neither of us has that information.
- dexen 8y ago
  A subsequent section on Wikipedia (link [1] in GP) tells us the following: >All US states also have laws regarding receipt of stolen property; however, there usually is no minimum dollar amount in many jurisdictions, and, of course, the requirement in Federal law regarding interstate commerce does not apply. i.e., USA-wide >Also, in many states (Ohio, for example), the burden to prove criminal intent is not as stringent or is nonexistent. i hereby rest my case.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    Curiously, the references backing those statements are both dead :)
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

jandrese 8y ago

If you surrender the goods and have a plausible reason for not knowing that they were stolen then you won't be prosecuted. You will be SoL on getting your money back unless you bought from the worlds most scrupulous fence though. It's a risk when you buy anything from eBay or the like, but the overall risk is small enough that the savings are justified usually.